Four Microsoft Programming Languages Compared
prostoalex writes "Prashant Sridharan, senior product manager for Microsoft's Visual Studio product, compares four Microsoft languages for .NET development. C++ (.NET version), C#, J# and VB.NET are explored with features of each language outlined. There are no usual "pro and con" lists, so the ever-popular "default public access" made into the "features
of VB."
I seem to remember there being MORE to programming than objects.
.NET Framework excels at interoperability, and the key to that is their OOP system; so obviously that's what they're going to point out as the killer feature. In my opinion, you're wasting your time with .NET if you're not going to take advantage of the platform to its fullest; but there's nothing stopping you from putting your procedural code into a thin object wrapper; and Microsoft Research has put together a few reference implementations of some functional languages -- but those are "fringe" languages, so they don't get top billing.
The
NO CARRIER
That is a bit unfair. While the author only deals with languages shipped by Microsoft, a number of others have been ported to the .Net platform.
See here
for a list.
The .Net framework and development tools are also free, and can be downloaded.
And efforts are being made for making .Net portable. Examples include Microsoft's own Rotor (Windows, FreeBSD and Mac OSX), Mono (Linux) and DotGNU (Linux).
ILAsm comes with the .net framework along with csc (C#), vbc (VB.Net), jsc (J#). That's what you're asking for, right?
C:\WINNT\Microsoft.NET\Framework\v1.1.4322>ilasm
Microsoft (R) .NET Framework IL Assembler. Version 1.1.4322.573
Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation 1998-2002. All rights reserved.
Usage: ilasm [Options] <sourcefile> [Options]
blah blah... usage options
If by "ported" you mean "a thin layer over .NET semantics", yeah, a lot of languages have that.
.NET, and efficiently so", then the numbers will drop off quite a bit.
.NET, and declined.
If by "ported" you mean "language X's objects are completely visible to
See this thread from comp.lang.lisp on why Franz Inc (the longest-surviving Common Lisp vendor) looked into porting their stuff to
To a Lisp hacker, XML is S-expressions in drag.
OK, troll, let's. So why not begin by explaining how ANSI C, C++, etc. are "real" languages, and how VB.NET, C#, are not.
<SideNote>Grow up -- M$ is like so 90's... dude.</SideNote>
Hell, now you can control the GUI itself with applescript! *note* I do not use AS so I can not comment on how well it works, I'll keep my perl thanks
There's already a skin for Java on the CLR. It's called C#. The biggest headache moving from Java to C# or vice versa is the library, although for all intents and purposes they overlap almost everywhere. Take my opinion with a grain of salt, but I'm the network engineer at my company and I can code better C# based on my Java experience than most of our developers who have taken "classes" in C#.
I think I'll AC on this one...